Hindutva, coined by Chandranath Basu in 1892, embodies the eternal essence of Sanatana Dharma, serving as its authentic indigenous name. This article rejects “Hinduism,” a colonial construct of Sanskrit and English, in favour of Hindutva, while disavowing its politicisation by Savarkar in 1923 for nationalist ends. Here, Hindutva stands synonymous with Sanatana Dharma.

Unlike Judaism, Christianity and Islam, which are based on prophetic monotheism and singular sacred texts, Hindutva weaves a vibrant tapestry of diverse practices and philosophies that resist rigid categorisation. Yet, Hindu traditions face a unique challenge: an expectation to justify their rituals through science, a burden rarely imposed on other faiths. This scrutiny, rooted in colonial legacies and an internalised sense of inferiority, stems from a historical compulsion to rationalise sacred practices. By affirming Hindu as a religion, not a mere “way-of-life,” Hindus can safeguard its sanctity, resolve the tension between science and faith, and reclaim its unapologetic religious identity. This article explores the historical origins of this scrutiny, its modern manifestations, and a path forward to preserve Hindutva’s heritage with confidence.

Sanatana Dharma- Not a way of Life:

The claim that Sanatana Dharma (Hindutva), is a way of life rather than a religion self-defeating undermining its spiritual depth. Hindu is unequivocally a religion, rich with sacred texts, rituals, and philosophies. While its flexible, non-dogmatic framework differs from the rigid prescriptions of Christianity or Islam, this distinction does not diminish its religious character. In fact, Abrahamic faiths, with their strict doctrines, are more rigid ways of life. Labelling Hindutva a way of life invites misinterpretation, exposing its practices to unwarranted scepticism.

For example, claiming puja enhances mental clarity shifts its devotional purpose to a scientific claim, inviting critique it was never meant to face. This urge to rationalise stems from a historical inferiority complex, forged over centuries of marginalisation under Muslim and British rule. Embracing Hindutva as a religion, equal in legitimacy to others, is essential to end this cycle of external judgment.

The word ‘religion’ has no equivalent in Indian languages, just as there is no English equivalent for ‘Dharma.’ A profound Sanskrit non-translatable, Dharma’s meaning varies contextually, yet in spiritual contexts, it undeniably means religion. Many Hindus, hesitant to embrace Dharma as religion, fall into the trap of rationalising Hindu traditions with scientific justifications. This compulsion to align sacred practices with rationality inflicts self-imposed wounds, diluting the spiritual depth of Hindu traditions and exposing them to unwarranted scrutiny. By recognising Dharma as equivalent to religion in spiritual contexts, Hindus can liberate their traditions from the need for external validation.

Colonial narratives and cultural defensiveness:

The unique scrutiny faced by Hindu traditions traces back to colonialism, which portrayed them as exotic, superstitious, or backward to justify colonial rule as a “civilising mission.” Orientalists like William Jones depicted Hindutva as chaotic, while accounts of the Kumbh Mela focused on crowds rather than its spiritual significance as a pilgrimage for purification. These narratives conflated social issues, like caste, with religious theology, painting Hindutva as flawed. Hindu reformers, internalising this critique, sought to align their traditions with Abrahamic frameworks. Dayananda Saraswati’s Arya Samaj, for instance, promoted monotheism, rejected Hindu texts except the Vedas, and condemned murti puja, mimicking Christianity and Islam.

This was not a reform but an “Abrahamisation” of Hindutva. Similarly, at the 1893 Parliament of the World’s Religions, Vivekananda presented yoga and Vedanta as rational and scientific, downplaying their spiritual essence to gain Western approval. Colonial education further drove intellectuals like Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan to re-interpret Hindu texts as scientific, a trend that persists in modern Hindu apologetics. Post-independence, anglicised Gurus and organisations like the sangh parivar have continued this rationalisation, notably claiming during International Yoga Day since 2015 that yoga is neither Hindu nor spiritual. Centuries of foreign rule fostered a defensive mindset, compelling Hindus to justify their practices empirically, unlike Christian and Muslim rituals, which rest on faith alone. This historical pressure explains why Hindutva faces demands for rational validation that no religion, Hindutva included, was designed to meet.

Rationalising the sacred in modern manifestations:

Today, Hindus’ tendency to justify sacred practices with scientific claims undermines their spiritual essence and invites scepticism. Three examples illustrate this trap:

• Fasting in Festivals: Practices like Navratri and Ekadashi fasts, rooted in devotion, are often recast as health trends, such as detoxification. This overshadows their sacred purpose, unlike Christian Lent or Muslim Ramzan, where fasting is embraced as an act of faith without scientific justification.

• Cow Reverence: The cow’s sanctity is diluted by dubious claims, like cow urine curing cancer, which invite ridicule. In contrast, Islam’s doctrinal aversion to pigs avoids debate by asserting divine will, not empirical proof.

• Vedic Chanting and Homa: These rituals, meant for spiritual transcendence, falter under scientific scrutiny they were never intended to face. Christian carols or the Muslim azan face no such demand for validation, as they make no scientific claims.

By tying sacred practices to science, Hindus expose them to standards they cannot meet, fuelling external critique and diminishing their spiritual depth. Unlike Christianity and Islam, which rest on belief alone, Hindus’ compulsive obsession with rationalising their sacred practices invites a self-inflicted vulnerability Reclaiming these practices as acts of faith, beyond empirical validation, is crucial to preserving their sanctity.

The science-faith divide-A fundamental distinction:

The root of this issue lies in a misunderstanding of science-faith separation. Science relies on empirical experiments, data, and testable hypotheses to uncover physical truths, while religion uses rituals and scriptures to address questions of meaning and transcendence. Judging faith by scientific standards does not align with its spiritual purpose, just as judging scientific theories by religious principles stifles inquiry. Hindu discourse often overlooks this distinction, driven by a colonial legacy that demands empirical justification. Christianity and Islam avoid this trap by grounding their rituals belief, not science. For example, no one questions the validity of Islamic salat or Christian communion with demands for scientific proof. By recognising this divide, Hindus can liberate their traditions from unwarranted scrutiny, allowing rituals to stand as expressions of faith, not scientific hypotheses.

Reclaiming Hindutva’s religious identity:

To navigate this science-faith dilemma, Hindus must reject the compulsion to rationalise their practices and affirm Hindu as a religion, not a way-of-life, rooted in faith and tradition. Three strategies can guide this path:

• Affirm Hindutva as a Faith-Based Tradition: By framing Hindu as a religion like other faiths, Hindus can present practices like puja and festivals as acts of devotion, not scientific tools, deflecting demands for rational validation. For instance, puja fosters mindfulness and gratitude, akin to Christian prayer or Islamic salat. This approach counters the historical pressure to prove Hindutva’s validity.

• Reclaim Narrative Control: Hindus must assert that their traditions are religious practices, not requiring scientific validation. While yoga’s health benefits are documented, its spiritual goal of self-realisation should remain paramount. Rejecting claims like ‘homa purifies air’ preserves the sacred purpose of rituals and breaks the cycle of self-inflicted critique rooted in colonial pressures.

• Educate the NextGeneration: Hindu gurus, parents, and educators should foster pride in Hindutva’s traditions without resorting to rationalisations. Cultural workshops, temple progr ams, and school curricula can teach youth the spiritual significance of Hindu festivals and traditions, building confidence in their heritage.

These steps counter the historical pressure to rationalise Hindu traditions and practices, allowing its rituals to stand as acts of faith, not subjects of scientific debate. By distinguishing religion from science, Hindus can honour their traditions’ timeless wisdom without the burden of external validation.

Conclusion

Hindutva (Sanatana Dharma) stands as a unique religion, defined by its diverse practices and rich spiritual heritage. Yet, it faces unparalleled scrutiny, driven by colonial narratives and a compulsive tendency among modern Hindus to justify its rituals through science. From Christian British portrayals of Hindu practices as backward to reformers’ attempts to align them with rational or Abrahamic frameworks, this scrutiny has persisted, intensified by modern rationalisations like claiming health benefits for fasting or cosmic effects for Vedic chanting. These efforts invite skepticism and erode spiritual depth, creating a science-faith dilemma. By affirming Hindu traditions as religious beliefs, rejecting empirical justifications, and educating future generations, Hindus can preserve the sanctity of their heritage.This approach liberates Hindu traditions from the colonial legacy of validation, allowing it to navigate modernity with confidence and fostering a deeper appreciation for its traditions among Hindus and observers alike.

(The author is a retired IPS officer and former Director, CBI. Views are personal)